Should we nationalise the railways?

[Robinho]

I do see your point, but the fact of the privatised network requiring ever-greater government subsidy may well nullify this to some extent. Had BR continued demanding less and less subsidy, things may have 'evened out' and made funds available for such projects.



Beyond that, privatisation has left us with a bewildering array of fare options.

My wider point was that BR's "efficiency" at the time was completley unsustainable, modernisation, renewals and maintenance were put off, requiring less funding and obviously also causing less disruption, meaning a short term increase in performance. That efficiency and decreasing subsidy, i beleive, would and could not have continued, as the investment had to be made sooner or later, and by it coming later it has probably cost more in the long term, as what could have been maintained had to be replaced. There was no way the infrastructure at privatisation could have taken the traffic or performed the journey times, now available. The downside is that investment means work being carried out, which causes disruption and reflects badly on the networks performance short term

[Rollo]

The full story from WW2-1994:
Austerity --> The Beeching Axe --> Rising Costs --> Starvation --> Incompetence

Whilst the United States was busily building the biggest public works program in history, in contrast Britain was destroying another. In 1950 BR had about 21,000 miles of track. From about 1950 until 1975 almost 9000 miles had been destroyed and about 3000 railway stations were shut forever.

After a period of post-war austerity, that prize ****-head Beeching (pick a sware word, all of them are appropriate) demanded the same salary that he had at ICI and rather than make the improvements that were necessary, he more or less hacked apart BR to such an extent that it couldn't ever be rescued.

Britain's rail network wasn't destroyed in WW2 but it certainly wasn't maintained properly and the Beeching Axe effectively did destroy it in the 1960s. Between rising labour costs under Wilson and Callaghan, Thatchers general ****headery to smash the crap out of government services and the incompetence of the Major government (for which Blair, Brown and now Cameron Governments have followed in that august tradition) completed the story.

The thing is that Governments don't have anywhere near the sort of vision they once did. Assuming that a trillion pounds was spent tomorrow, I think it would take at least 15 years to basically rip-up and start again. Maybe when Pamela Nash, MP for Airdrie and Shotts is old enough to be a Senior Cabinet minister, provided the money was spent tomorrow, a nationalised British Rail would again be an efficient and competent system.

In principle though a nationalised rail service is the most efficient, simply because when it comes to infrastructure, it's at its most efficient when the capital base required to invest and maintain is there and that only exists in public hands.

[BDunnell]

Whilst the United States was busily building the biggest public works program in history, in contrast Britain was destroying another. In 1950 BR had about 21,000 miles of track. From about 1950 until 1975 almost 9000 miles had been destroyed and about 3000 railway stations were shut forever.

After a period of post-war austerity, that prize ****-head Beeching (pick a sware word, all of them are appropriate) demanded the same salary that he had at ICI and rather than make the improvements that were necessary, he more or less hacked apart BR to such an extent that it couldn't ever be rescued.

It must be said that large swathes of the network probably could never have survived. Britain probably had too large a network. But there was no need for Beeching's cuts to go too far.

[Bolton Midnight]

BR was truly dire on whatever level you cared to judge it on. If the cost of getting from A to B on a train really is that high then so be it, why should it be subsidised? My petrol certainly isn't.

Removing Unions would improve things no end.

[BDunnell]

BR was truly dire on whatever level you cared to judge it on.

No it wasn't. Many rail industry experts and historians — whose opinions on such a matter I would tend to place above those of the layman — would certainly beg to disagree, for starters.

[MrMetro]

It must be said that large swathes of the network probably could never have survived. Britain probably had too large a network. But there was no need for Beeching's cuts to go too far.

Indeed, I live near the Settle-Carlisle line, which Beeching wanted, but never got to close.

[MrMetro]

BR was truly dire on whatever level you cared to judge it on. If the cost of getting from A to B on a train really is that high then so be it, why should it be subsidised? My petrol certainly isn't.

Removing Unions would improve things no end.

Dire in what ways Bolton Midnight?

In the 1980's, the Network SouthEast division was pretty much running at a profit, as was Inter-City.

[Mark]

I don't know, remember back "in the day" Britain had a massively extensive railway network, you could get to pretty much anywhere in the country by train and most places had a station. It was simply silly to have expensive railways and very expensive trains running to some places which were no more than villages, when there was a much cheaper solution of road travel using buses & private cars.

However I do agree that the cuts went too far and some places of a decent size lost service completely when it should have been maintained or even expanded.

It's often said the problem with the way things are now is that the TOCs have to pay exorbitant prices to rent their trains, mostly from the banks (it always comes back to the banks doesn't it?!) whereas if they were one organsiation they could purchase and run their own trains.

However I think the main problem is the way the government does it's accounting, for public utilities it owns it can't do investment as this would count as 'public spending', so it instead relies on the likes of banks to stump up the cash and then it repays them at crazy rates from now until forever more.

Should the railways be nationalised? Yes; there's no doubt that given there is zero competition on the network it would be best off run as a single entity, however it needs to be done properly, at arms length from the government and with guaranteed funding levels. The main issue with BR was that it was far too easy for successive governments to cut rail funding in order to satisfy budgets elsewhere.

[SGWilko]

I was/am fortunate enough to live in Kent, and for many a year - first travelling from Tonbridge to CharingX, then from Farningham Road to Victoria under the Connex franchise.

When they got the boot for 'irregularities' in their accounts the government, very hush hush, was looking after the running of the network.

Trains were rarely late for the usual stupid reasons of insufficient rolling stock or staff who lost the ability to work an alarm clock.

There were no refunds that year due to the improved reliability. Of course, it was not publicised that the network was much improved......

Until last month, I was being ferried into town by Southeastern. They were not too bad. It always amused me how the coast bound 07:18 train always arrived and left Farningham road before my 07:17 train Victoria arrived - it was always 'on time' according to the announcements mind you!

I'm on a 50cc moped now - which maybe takes 10 - 15 mins longer, but will save me approximately £1,250 a year after the fare increase kicks in!

So I'd be all for a nationalised system, that is run for the customer not the shareholder. I'd also like to see much more freight on the railways.

Still - we can but dream, cos it aint gonna happen, is it?

When we holiday in Scotland, some of our favourite walks in the Borders are along Beeching's torn up railway track beds........

[SGWilko]

Dire in what ways Bolton Midnight?

In the 1980's, the Network SouthEast division was pretty much running at a profit, as was Inter-City.

Cor - they were the days. I remember when they ran 'Network Days', when you could buy a ticket that wuould take you anywhere on the Network for the whole day!

(PS - I don't own an anorak, notepad, pen and I don't sound like John Major :laugh